Rajdeep Kaur Vs Sunny Kumar

Prayer in this petition file d by petitioner-wife is for transfer o f the petition filed by respond e nt-husband under Sections 12(2)(a)( i ) and 13 of the Hindu Marria g e Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) be a ring DMC/315/2025 titled as “ Sunny Kumar vs. Rajdeep Kaur” ( A nnexure P-2) pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family C ourt, Fatehgarh Sahib to a Cou r t of competent jurisdiction at Ludhi a na.

¶16

Learned counsel for the peti t ioner submits :- i) That the parties were marri e d on 14.11.2021 according to Sikh rites and rituals.

¶17

ii) That a female child was bor n out of this wedlock, whose date of birth is 20.12.2022 a n d is in the care and custody of the petitioner.

¶18

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

TA-186-2026 (O & M) 2

¶20

iii) That the petitioner-wife is living separately from the respondent-husband since 18.4.2023 and living alongwith her minor child a g ed 03 years with her parents at their mercy at Ludhiana.

¶21

iv ) That the petitioner is unem p loyed, having no source of income and totally depende n t upon her old aged parents and the respondent-husband is not paying anything to her towards maintenance.

¶22

v) That the proceedings arising out of petition :-

¶23

(a) under the Pr o tection of Women from Domestic Viole n ce Act, 2005

¶24

filed by the petitioner-wife , are pending in the Courts having competent jurisdictio n at Ludhiana.

¶25

vi) That the distance between place of residence of the petitioner-wife i.e. Ludh i ana and the place of proceedings under Section 1 2(2)(1)(i) and 13 of the Act, filed by the respondent-h u sband, pending before the Principal Judge, Family Co u rt, Fatehgarh Sahib, is about 64 kilometers on one side.

¶26

vii ) That there is no proficient m ale member in the family of petitioner who can acco mp any her to the Court of proceedings at Fatehgarh Sa h ib.

¶27

1. It is inter alia on these gro u nds that petitioner prays for

¶28

transfer of the case, as detailed in para 1 a bove.

¶29

Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to controve r t the above said facts, however , oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner r egarding transfer of the proceedi n gs under Section 12(2)(1)(i) a n d 13 of the Act, filed by the responde n t-husband to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhian a .

¶30

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

3

¶32

TA-186-2026 (O & M)

¶33

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

¶34

the case f ile.

¶35

The legal position in such l i ke cases as the present one, is well e s tablished. In this regard, judg m ent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court re n dered in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 , is most relevant wherein the Hon’ble S upreme Court has held as unde r :-

¶36

“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil P r ocedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonia l matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the p lea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration t h e economic soundness of both the parties, the social strat a of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their stan d ard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out t h eir livelihood and under whose protective umbrella t hey are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the p revailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be lo o ked at while considering transfer.

¶37

Further, when two or more p roceedings are pending in different Courts between the s ame parties which raise common question of fact and la w , and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent , it is desirable that they should be tried together by the s ame Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the sa m e issues and conflict of decisions.”

¶38

Further reliance can be pl a ced upon the judgments in “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 and “Rajani Kishor Pardeshivs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi”, 2005(12) SCC 237 , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that “while deciding t he transfer application, the Co u rts are required to give more weightag e and consideration to the c onvenience of the female litigants a nd transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another

¶39

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶40

4

¶41

TA-186-2026 (O & M)

¶42

should o rdinarily be allowed, takin g into consideration their convenie n ce and the Courts should d esist from putting female litigants u nder undue hardships.”

¶43

Even this Court in numbe r of cases has followed the aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while consideri n g the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case, at the instance of the wi f e, the Court is to consider the f amily condition of the wife, the custo d y of the minor child, econom i c condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most importan t the convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without a ssistance of a male member o f her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of re s idence as well as bearing of the litiga t ion charges and travelling expe n ses.

¶44

In view of the facts mentio n ed above and the judgments i.e. Sumita Singh’s case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) a n d N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case (s u pra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court deems it app r opriate to allow the present petition, s ubject to the following conditio n s:-

¶45

a) The petition filed b y respondent husband under Sections 12(2)(a)(i) a nd 13 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing N o . DMC/315/2025 titled as ‘Sunny Kumar vs. R a jdeep Kaur’, pending in the Court of Principal Ju d ge, Family Court, Fatehgarh Sahib is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhia n a.

¶46

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶47

TA-186-2026 (O & M) 5

¶48

b) The ld. District Judge , Fatehgarh Sahib is directed to transfer complet e record pertaining to the aforesaid case to Dist r ict Judge, Ludhiana.

¶49

c) The parties are dir e cted to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on 15.6.2026.

¶50

d) The District Judge, L u dhiana will assign the said petition to the Court o f competent jurisdiction.

¶51

1. The concerned Court at Ludhiana will make all

¶52

endeavo u r to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre f o r exploring the possibility o f some amicable settlement between t he parties.

¶53

The Court concerned, w h ere the litigation pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar m onth.

¶54

I am supported by the decisions rendered by a Coordinate B ench of this Court in TA No. 1315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet Singh ; and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Singh.

¶55

Disposed of. Pending application(s), if an y , stands disposed of.

¶56

May 12, 2 026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

¶57

Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No

¶58

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 17.10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajdeep Kaur v. Sunny Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajdeep Kaur v. Sunny Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudarshana Batra Vs Amit Arora President Dist Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Faridabad

Jawahar Lal Vs Pushpinder Kumar

Sandeep Singh and Others Vs Kumar Rahul and Others

Payal Vs Deepanshu Kumar

Harmanpreet Kaur Vs Lovepreet Singh

Neha Gupta Vs Rohit Gupta